SynthesisPloS one2025
Parental mediation and the use of social networks: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parent-child communication and adolescent problematic internet use: A cross-sectional dyadic study of protective effects and the primacy of adolescents' own perceptions.Addictive behaviors reports · 2026Article
- The Effects of Family-Based Programs on Preschool Children's Screen Time: A Systematic Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social networks are used daily by almost all adolescents and young people. They are used extensively, and their positive aspects are well-known, but they present multiple risks. Parents' mediation (PM) in their children's use of social networks (SNs) to prevent numerous problems has been recently researched. This systematic review analyzed works published since 2012 about online PM strategies concerning the use of SNs by children/adolescents aged between 9 and 18 years old. Following the PRISMA protocol, this review was submitted to Prospero (ID: CRD42022345033), five electronic databases were examined (WOS, SCOPUS, ERIC, ProQuest Psychology, and PubMed), and to assess the risk of bias the ROBIS tool was used. 32 papers were selected. The results indicate that PM strategies (especially the restrictive strategies over the enabling ones) effectively reduce the time spent on SNs and their associated risks. However, it is unclear whether one type of strategy is more effective or whether a combination of the different strategies, depending on the problem to be addressed, is most effective. Finally, no studies have been found that have analyzed the relationship between PM strategies and the benefits associated with the use of SNs. Possible lines of action for future programs and research are proposed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.